American Council on Science and Health
Publish Date: December 14, 2005 (Editor’s Note: I know this goes back a bit, but some oldies need to be repeated every so often. Especially since the greenies keep coming out with the same tired old claims in hopes that there is a new crop of the un-informed, misinformed and gullible. Although it does seem that the public is recognizing them as the “boy who cried wolf” more and more.)
Efforts to link environmental factors to cancer have foundered recently, as highlighted in an article by New York Times science reporter, Gina Kolata.
But those who subscribe to the cancer cluster theory still aren’t satisfied. So how do you explain an alleged increased rate of cancer in a small area? Our Cancer Clusters: Findings vs. Feelings addressed some of the key weaknesses in the theory that they can be chalked up to manmade causes such as industrial chemicals.
But now there is a new chink in the activist armor. Infections could be a cause of some childhood cancers, according to a study published this week. This study, which is consistent with earlier research, challenges the notion that environmental toxins are to blame for alleged clusters of childhood cancers.
Dr. Richard McNally, of the University of Newcastle upon Tyne in England found that leukemia, the most common type of childhood cancer, may be triggered by an “infection in a mother while she is carrying her baby,” or be triggered if a child is infected with certain viruses while young.
Dr. Richard McNally, of the University of Newcastle upon Tyne in England found that leukemia, the most common type of childhood cancer, may be triggered by an “infection in a mother while she is carrying her baby,” or be triggered if a child is infected with certain viruses while young.
To Read More……
Editor's Note: I have found that the links no longer work. I found another link for "Cancer Clusters: Findings vs. Feelings, but I have no way of tracking the others as there is no article title attached. RK
No comments:
Post a Comment